About your Search

Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
at the gdp number, what is interesting, part of the reason why it contracted, there were cuts to defense spending. the obama administration saying this is an indication that spending cuts, what republicans calling for, don't necessarily work. the thing that is sort of looming over this mixed bag, this economy picture that we got this week, are, of course, these fiscal fights coming up on the horizon. republicans and democrats will have to deal with that. first up, the sequester which could potentially work in deeper spending cuts to defense spending, nondiscretionary spending. that's something that the white house, that congress will really have to deal with, and that's sort of first up on the list of fiscal fights in a series of them, alex, on the horizon. >> kristen welker, thank you for that. we'll see you in the best of office politics in a half an hour. >>> later on, new campaign for immigration reform. a new report suggests it may not be much of a help for the republican party which lost the hispanic vote in historic numbers in november. the story in 30 minutes or so. >>> also new
about 1.5 million. they might come in and she didn't read every single one. that was her defense. >> that's her answer. i think that was flawed, t.j. >> let let's both and let the viewers listen to shg she eluded to and pointed to as part of the problem with security that has to do with funding. let's listen. >> since march 2011, congressional holds have been placed on programs for many months for aid to libya. we have had frequent congressional complaints. why are we doing anything for libya. it's a wealthy country. it has oil, disagreement from some sources that we should have never been part of any u.n. mission in libya. currently, the house has holds on bilateral security assistance, on other kinds of support for anti-terrorism assistance. >> what she mentions there, and it's accurate. we can look at the record and go back there are times when the administration would request a certain amount of money for security around the world and the republican house wanted to slash some of that money. now, how can you go about -- aren't we all -- aren't you all i should say, responsible
. >>> in today's strategy talk, through the gauntlet, defense secretary nominee chuck hagel faced a brutal confirmation hearing on thursday, stumbling at times as the senators grilled him. but senior white house adviser dan fiver now says they have the votes and there is no question hagel will be confirmed. joining me now is media strategist and former spokeswoman for transportation secretary lahood. also former deputy white house press secretary under president george w. bush. we're sorry about barney passing. >> like a very heart-felt note from president bush yesterday on barney's passing. look, all of us who spent time in the west wing, we loved seeing barney. barney around or on the south lawn with the president. so he's missed. >> well, definitely. and our hearts go out to them. that's tough. anyway, jill, i'll begin with you. let's take a listen to this. here we go. >> i have already stated that i regret the terminology. i've already noted that i should have used another term. the bigger point is, what i was saying, i think -- what i meant to say should have said it's recognizable. i
was the secretary of defense that would lift this ban. i felt like given his history this was something he would understand. the fact that it came as a suggestion unanimously from the joint chiefs makes it very validating for me. being in the military, so it's not -- the people who don't want things dictated to the military, they can't say that now, because the joint chiefs do what's in the military's best interest and recognize the policy is damaging. >> the lawsuit how does it stand now? is it dropped? >> i can't really speak to the legal, technical aspects. from what i understand, the lawsuit continues until we see something in writing that satisfies all the stipulations of the lawsuit. but this is what we were hoping for. >> what about the op-ed arguing that both men and women would feel humiliated in front of each other due to sanitary issues of infantry combat, having to shower in the open, lots of nudity there. what did you think about that? >> you know, i have to be honest, it kind of made me chuckle and makes me happy that the opposition's arguments have come down to this. we have succe
and it was a unanimous decision along with the secretary of defense, leon panetta, laid out for the services that every role should try to be open. and if the services decide that their particular roles, particular jobs that they just for whatever reason that women wouldn't meet the qualifications, they can ask for an exemption. but the reality is that everything is on the table now. and they also said this will take awhile to do. and we're going to phase it in. some places will be easier. in some particular roles we've seen women over and over in the commanders have seen them there. they'll say hey, you know, this one's ready to go now. and in others we need to take a look at what it takes to do those jobs. and maybe for awhile, especially these last ten years, we've been so busy fighting wars that we haven't taken a look and said, what are the real qualifications for that job? so i think the services will be taking a look at are they the right qualifications right now? do we need to change those qualifications? what's really required to do that job? and i would add this. even though we may change the
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)